Differentiating among stages of cognitive impairment in aging: Version 3 of the Uniform Data Set (UDS) neuropsychological test battery and MoCA index scores
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Federally funded Alzheimer's Disease Centers in the United States have been using a standardized neuropsychological test battery as part of the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set (UDS) since 2005. Version 3 (V3) of the UDS replaced the previous version (V2) in 2015. We compared V2 and V3 neuropsychological tests with respect to their ability to distinguish among the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) global scores of 0, 0.5, and 1. METHODS: First, we matched participants receiving V2 tests (V2 cohort) and V3 tests (V3 cohort) in their cognitive functions using tests common to both versions. Then, we compared receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) area under the curve in differentiating CDRs for the remaining tests. RESULTS: Some V3 tests performed better than V2 tests in differentiating between CDR 0.5 and 0, but the improvement was limited to Caucasian participants. DISCUSSION: Further efforts to improve the ability for early identification of cognitive decline among diverse racial groups are required.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it